Pages

Praetorium Honoris

Monday, January 26, 2026

How to get High...Fast! Redux

 

Given the weather forecast for this past weekend, Electrical Power was kinda "iffy".  No power, no posting. So...You get a repeat from a few years ago.  

 No, Beans, this post has nothing to do with crack pipes. The idea came to me while reading a link I found on Instapundit a while back.  The post was fairly interesting as it discussed a proposal to modify F-15E's to carry a 45' long missile and launch it at altitude and speed.  Currently, most of a missile's fuel is used getting it off the ground and up to an altitude.  Launching it from altitude and speed would alleviate that problem.  

What caught my eye were a couple of things.  First, this.


The F-15D, at the top, ~35 years ago had my name painted on the canopy rail.  Glad to see she's still around and kicking.

The second thing that caught my eye was the launch profile they proposed to use.


I recognized it immediately.  It's called the Rutowski Climb profile.  For those of you who are engineering oriented, here's a detailed description. For those of you German Engineers, try this one out. And for those of you with a Naval background, here's one for you.

Basically, the objective is to get as much altitude and speed as possible in the least amount of time.  It was theorized and developed in the 70's as a means to defend against the MiG-25 Foxbat, a very fast, high flying fighter.  (That was proven to be somewhat overrated when Viktor Belenko defected in one in '76).  

In any case, the F-15 was used to test the theory and did so by busting several time to climb records in the Streak Eagle program.  Most of those records still stand.

I recognized it, because while stationed at Kadena, we practiced it because the Russian's had the MiG 25 in the area and it was rumored that the North Koreans had some also.

So, we would practice the maneuver pretty regularly.  We referred to them as the "High Fast Profile".  Our target referred to that portion of their mission as the "Low, Slow Profile".

Our Target
Source

We would intercept them as they returned to Kadena from "parts unknown".  We'd orbit in the mid 30's saving gas and GCI would commit us to the intercept at about 200 miles. Suffice it to say, they were WELL above us.

We'd turn hot, light the burners and begin the climb profile.  We'd push over to 0 g.  (Basically, Beans, my 200 Lb (then...now +) body would be weightless.) The engines were at max and we'd continue that descent until we were well above the Mach.  

Then we'd pull it into a climb to gain as much altitude as possible when we reached weapons range.  Timing of this maneuver was absolutely crucial.  Closure rates of 2000NM/hour were regular. To put that in layman's terms, that's 33.3 Nautical miles/minute or ~1 mile every 2 seconds.  So the intercept is either made or missed in less than 400 seconds.  

So, yeah, we practiced the Rutowski Climb profile....a lot.  In fact the highest I've ever been was the result of one.  GCI turned me hot at about 190NM.  (They needed training also, newish guy on the scope, didn't realize that 10 NM is critical.) Typically, the climb angle was about 45o and the target indicator would be steady in the HUD.  That was not the case on this intercept, it was moving towards the top of the HUD.  

So, me being me, I kept pulling, making my climb angle steeper and steeper.  I pass through 50k' as he passes above me (Well Above) and I'm nearly vertical.  About this time, I learn an important lesson. Jet engines need air to run.  In addition, the flight controls need air to function.  There is very little air above 50K'.  

In short I'm riding a bullet with nothing to do until gravity takes pity on me and begins pulling me back to Earth.  That happened at 78,123' on my altimeter.  The sky was very dark and the SR-71 was a reddish-white.

The GCI guy and I reviewed my video tape in private.  No sense in causing consternation in our higher ups.

And THAT is why I recognized the Rutowski Climb Profile immediately.

30 comments:

  1. 78K plus juvat? That is higher than a kite sir.........:)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it was! And dark and no air to keep the engines running. Quite exciting and a bit scary.

      Delete
  2. A good story for a Monday, maybe not as good as your usual Monday fare but pretty good none the less!
    78k+ feet is pretty high & a number to remember...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh trust me. There were a lot of numbers to remember. Not trying to start until below 50k ( no oxygen) Being 150 miles at sea and me in the raft. Being a small dot in a large ocean. Oh and remembering my target wasn’t black, it was a whitish red and going like a scalded ass deer through the sky well above me.
      Believe me, there were two moments when my heart started beating normally, when the engines restarted and the landing gear touched the runway. A thank you prayer was uttered after both.

      juvat

      Delete
  3. I read the article on the F-15 as a rocket launch platform. Thing is, it had already been demonstrated with the Boeing/LTV ASAT (AntiSATellite) system back in the 1980s. That was never mentioned in the article.

    Up at 78k feet, the view must be good. You were in the realm of the U-2 and SR-71. The lack of air outside must have made the cockpit a little bit "high". While not that high, I can extrapolate the control response from when I did a HALO drop from 25k; the C-130 felt like a wallowing pig.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BillB,
      The ‘80’s were when I was flying the Eagle and this occurred. Just sayin’.
      juvat

      Delete
  4. Good post, thanks.

    But I need to stop trying to read this blog on my phone without my glasses. I read "The F-15D, at the top" as "The
    F-150 on the top," which brought to my peabrain an image of a somewhat beat up white and turquoise ranch truck strapped to the aeroplane.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. F-15 and F150, both excellent platforms. Can’t wait til I can drive again and get another F150 to replace the one in the accident.
      juvat

      Delete
    2. But would you strap it on top of an F-15D?

      Delete
    3. No probably not, but the temptation to do so would mean I OWNED an F-15D. Life would be great then. Except for the maintenance and Fuel!
      juvat

      Delete
  5. At that altitude did you stall? If so, how did you recover?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess technically it was a stall. The jet ran out of airspeed (and air under the wings) fortunately the nose of the jet fell through the horizon so we started downhill. Once we got in the 40’s there was enough air to restart the engines. Things got rapidly better after that.
      juvat

      Delete
  6. And here was I, thinking this was a "How To" post. 😉🤔😎🤣

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Well it is, if you need to get a target in your gunsight. Otherwise,...
      juvat

      Delete
  7. Interesting read.

    I am amazed more people do not have generators.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TSquared, we did at our last house, We will in our new house when completed. The rental doesn't have one, but we were lucky and didn't lose power last night, nothing was flashing when we woke up this morning. I don't know if the city lost any power, but haven't heard either way.
      juvat

      Delete
    2. Juvat, another helpful power outage hint. Have an old a/c powered clock (like an alarm clock with no battery backup) plugged in. The time it is slow shows how long the power was off (if less than 12 hours).

      Delete
    3. Juvat, I have had a 3Kw true sign wave inverter for over 20 years. I was in the ATL with underground lines. The longest we we without power for thirty years was about 8 hours. The new place in south GA I was without power for a week during the hurricane last year. An inverter does not cut it for more than a day. I went all the way, 1000 gal LP tank, and Kohler140 Amp genset with automatic transfer switch. I am good for a week constant run but I know how to stretch it out to twice that. Those Harbor Freight 4500W are less than a grand and can keep the heat on and the fridge running for 14 gallons a day.

      Delete
    4. Don,
      Not a bad idea! Wish I'd thought about it! Now to find an electric clock. I don't think my iWatch, iPhone or iPad will be affected by a power outage. :-)
      juvat

      Delete
    5. TSquared,
      We had a propane powered generator at our old house. Worked like a charm. Came on as soon as the power dropped off and stayed on as long as we needed it. I think the longest outage was about a day/day and a half. But...it was a wonderful thing to have on han. As I mentioned somewhere, A propane generator will be in the building plan for our "forever" home here.
      juvat

      Delete
    6. I knew a guy who built a place (out in the country) and bought a BIG propane tank, he only had to have the tank filled once a year and he did that when the price was low. Being his own tank he could shop around for the best price.

      Delete
    7. Ours was pretty big also. I don't remember having to refill it very often. But I think we were just lucky. It only started up a few times other than the monthly fire it up to check it out.
      juvat

      Delete
  8. I remember first hearing about this maneuver in Clancy's Red Storm Rising when an Eagle driver took out a Satellite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, and he did a pretty good job in describing it.
      juvat

      Delete
  9. You're lucky you didn't get a 'departure' stall and tumble at altitude. Friends that flew the TR-2 talked about the 'time' it took to get to altitude, but they just pinned the stick aft and climbed at 80+ degrees for a half hour or more until they got 'there'...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Old NFO, I used up quite a bit of luck on that mission and waiting for getting back down to lower altitudes where things (e.g. engines, flight ontrols etc) was high on my mind. Right behing praying.
      juvat

      Delete
    2. So you flew up until the air was too thin for your engines to run, then you glided down & down until the air was thick enough for the engine to start? I'll bet that was a long trip down in the quiet... Good story!

      Delete
    3. Rob,
      Well depends on your point of view. When I viewed the gun camera film after the flight, it was only about 30-45 seconds. My heart and brain kept telling me it was "forever!"
      juvat

      Delete
  10. It looks to me like the NASA F-15 is carrying an AIM-54 Phoenix missile......?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DrJim,
      Hadn't noticed that. At first glance, I just thought it was a center line fuel tank. Didn't look closely enough. Could very well have been a Phoenix.
      Thanks for pointing that out.
      juvat

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.